Whittle Vs. Morris (Child Custody)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding built-in apportionment cannot apply where the expert “conducted no assessment of the licensed technology versus the accused technology to account for any differences.”
• affirming a Daubert order excluding an expert’s opinion regarding reasonable royalty rate for failure to apportion
• affirming Daubert motion to exclude expert opinion on damages for failure to properly apportion
• “[W]hile MLC 3 was not required to disclose its expert opinions during fact discovery, MLC was still required to 4 || disclose the factual basis for its reasonable royalty claim.”
• excluding damages expert’s opinion for failure to apportion
• applying Georgia-Pacific factors to reasonable royalty analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).